UTAH ROCK ART
VOLUME XXX
Papers Presented at the Thirtieth
Annual Symposium
of the Utah Rock Art Research Association (URARA)
Blanding, Utah
October 8—11, 2010
Edited by Joe Brame, Christine Oravec, and Nina Bowen
Published 2012 by the Utah Rock Art Research Association
Copyright 2012 by the Utah Rock Art Research Association, Salt Lake City, Utah.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any
means without permission from the author and the publisher.
Printed in the United States of America
ii
CONTENTS
Galal R. Gough
Rainbows and Arcs in Native American
Rock Art
XXX-1
Bernard M. Jones, The Shaman's Crook: A Visual Metaphor of
Jr
Numinous Power in Rock Art
XXX-9
Richard Jenkinson Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route
XXX-29
iii \
Bernard M. Jones, Jr
iv
Richard Jenkinson
ROCK ART ON AN ANCIENT MIGRATORY ROUTE
I. THE PROJECT
The location of rock art often reflects how
native people moved through the landscape,
and the rock art itself was a part of their
experience of the land. Years ago I read that
people probably moved between the Green and
Colorado Rivers by traveling through Hell
Roaring Canyon, Seven Mile Canyon and
Courthouse Wash. There is intermittent water
throughout the route and the walking and river
crossings are relatively easy. I realized that
anyone continuing on to the La Sal Mountains
would walk through Mill Creek, because it has
a perennial stream and a direct route to the
mountains.
I mentioned this idea to Gary Cox, a long time
ranger at Hans Flat, and he pointed out to me
that Horseshoe Canyon, home to the Great
Gallery and other impressive rock art panels,
connects to the Green River just above Hell
Roaring Canyon, and that it was all probably
an ancient migratory route for native people.
At that point I decided that it would be fun and
informative to hike the entire route, document
all of the rock art sites that I come across and
see what insights come from encountering
these sites on foot instead of by SUV.
the canyons, and I was aware of about 30 rock
art sites in the study area. My original hope
was that I would be able to find a total of at
least 100 sites, but I was pretty far off in my
hypothesis. So far I have hiked the route from
the Green River to upper Mill Creek and I have
documented 134 rock art sites in 49 miles of
canyons. I’m sure Horseshoe Canyon will
bring many more. This essay will report on
what I have found along the route between the
Green River and the La Sals, draw some
objective conclusions based on data, and also
put forth some more subjective conclusions
based on the experience of encountering these
rock art sites on foot as the native people did.
The are two public rock art sites along the way,
the Moab Panel at the mouth of Courthouse
Wash and the Moab Man Panel across from the
Moab Golf Course. I designate these public
because they are included in a pamphlet on
rock art of the Moab area and visitation is
encouraged. Another panel at Bartlett Wash
has an information board at the parking area, so
visitation there is at least somewhat
encouraged. The other 131 panels are less well
known. My goal was to walk to all of these
sites and see what insights might come from
viewing them as a group.
The route includes about 95 miles of canyons
(Figure 1). I had already hiked in parts of all of
XXX-29
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
Figure 1.
II. DOCUMENTATION
For each site I filled out a brief documentation
form and took photos. The form includes
entries for the following categories:
Site:
Location:
Rock Art:
Type of Site:
Time Period:
Habitation:
Water:
Geological Strata:
Elevation:
Attractions:
At least one photo
XXX-30
I wanted to keep the form short and simple
because I had to carry everything on my back.
I tried to keep it all on one page. Quentin
Baker suggested that I record plants that are
found in the area of the site, but I chose not to
because I am not confident in my ability to
identify all of the plants, and since all of these
canyons have been extensively grazed, I didn’t
think the current plants would be a realistic
reflection of what was available in the area in
the past. A copy of the documentation page
was kept in a folder on my computer and a
printed page was kept in a notebook. A sample
page (Figure 2) shows how a finished page
looks.
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route Site: Moab Panel
Location: Outside of the mouth of Courthouse
Wash, on the ledges above Highway 191
GPS:
Rock Art:
Pictographs and Petroglyphs.
Some very impressive BCS anthros,
unfortunately severely vandalized, but still
discernible. The panel is probably at least ten
yards wide, but most of the north end is
difficult to make out. The petroglyphs are at
the base of the BCS panel. They are apparently
of Formative origin.
Type of Site: Billboard, meant to be seen by
anyone entering the Moab Valley through the
crossing near today’s highway bridge.
Each category presented its own issues, which
are summarized in the following paragraphs.
Site
Each site was given a name. I tried to use
descriptive names only and to avoid names that
would prejudice the way the people see the
panel. Some panels already have a commonly
used name and I retained those, even when I
felt that they might prejudice interpretation.
For example, I am not so sure that the central
figure of the Intestine Man panel (Figure 3)
depicts intestines or even an anthropomorphic
figure, but I kept the commonly accepted
name.
Time Period: Archaic and Formative
Habitation: No
Water: Plentiful. Courthouse is nearby, and
so is the Colorado River.
Geological Strata: Kayenta
Elevation: 4093
Attractions: A perfect billboard location high
above the valley floor but easily accessible. It
would be seen by everyone who came through
the area.
At least one photo:
Figure 3. The Intestine Man Panel
A site was defined somewhat subjectively.
Some sites are as close as ten yards apart, but
they didn’t seem to belong together, so I
separated them in order to be able to provide
more accurate data. Other sites extend over a
greater distance, but there is continuity, either
in imagery or in the physical site. For example
one site, a long-inhabited alcove, is probably
close to two hundred yards long and has twenty
rock art panels. Sites ranged from one figure to
hundreds of figures.
Figure 2. Sample Documentation Page
XXX-31
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
Location
Location was described verbally and with GPS
coordinates. Each site was plotted on a map
using National Geographic topo software to
help me get a feeling for how sites are spaced
and clumped on the landscape.
Rock Art
The rock art was described verbally and
recorded with photographs. I noted whether
the rock art was petroglyphs, pictographs or
both. Some sites are easy to describe verbally
because they are small and simple. Other sites,
the many large and complex ones, are almost
impossible to describe adequately with words.
I kept many photos in my computer file for
these large sites.
Type of Site
This included designations like billboard,
habitation, along the trail, near water source,
etc. This category didn’t turn out to be very
useful, because almost every site is near the
trail and water and not far from a habitation
site. This entire route proved to be wellwatered, highly livable and easily traveled.
Figure 4. Bartlett Wash Panel, dated at about
2000 years old
For all other panels I had to make a subjective
judgment based on rock art style. I’m not very
confident in my ability to do this with much
accuracy. I think that when objective methods
of dating rock art are further refined, there will
be many revelations concerning our
assumptions regarding the absolute ages of
panels. For my project I labeled every panel as
Archaic, Formative or Ute. I used the term
“Formative” instead of Anasazi or Fremont
because in the Moab area both groups were
present and much of the rock art shows
characteristics of both cultures. There were
only two panels that I identified as Ute, both
containing shield figures (Figures 5 and 6).
Time Period
There is one panel in the study area that has
been scientifically dated. The panel at Bartlett
Wash (Figure 4) has been dated to
approximately 2000 years old (Tipps 160),
which makes it late Archaic.
Figure 5. Ute Shield Figure
XXX-32
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route be of significance. The areas that appeared to
me to have been most heavily occupied were
upper Hell Roaring Canyon, the Dubinky
Well/Bartlett Wash area, middle Seven Mile
Canyon, lower Courthouse Wash, and Mill
Creek.
Water
Figure 6. Ute Rock Art figures
I suspect that one panel is Pueblo IV (Figure
7).
Figure 7. Possible Pueblo IV Panel
Habitation
I hoped to be able to look at panels that were
associated with habitation sites to see whether
or not they had any distinguishing
characteristics that other panels lacked. Some
panels were obviously in alcoves that had been
occupied, but others were so close that I felt
that their proximity to habitation sites was
significant.
Then it became difficult to
determine how close to a habitation site was
close enough. Ultimately, these canyons were
so heavily used and occupied that I felt that all
sites were relatively close to a habitation site,
so I don’t consider my data in this category to
I thought proximity to a water source might
also yield characteristics that could be
revealing. I had hiked in all of these canyons
before, but until I hiked the length of each of
the canyons I did not realize how well-watered
these canyons are. I never had to walk far to
the next water source and the walking was
easy, which explains why this was an ancient
migratory route through the area. There is a
perennial stream throughout Lower Seven Mile
Canyon and Courthouse Wash and again
through the length of Mill Creek. At places
there was so much water that I struggled to
successfully jump across it. In Lower Seven
Mile canyon some of the springs were so active
that it sounded like someone was running water
into a bathtub. Ultimately, like habitation sites,
proximity
to
water
proved
to
be
inconsequential because water was never far
away.
The two driest areas were in lower Hell
Roaring Canyon and middle Seven Mile.
Lower Hell Roaring had a couple of areas
where water is occasionally present, but was
absent when I hiked through. There was no
rock art in lower Hell Roaring Canyon and few
rock surfaces that would have been appropriate
for rock art. Middle Seven Mile, however, has
a heavy concentration of rock art and the
greatest concentration of Archaic rock art
between the Green River and the La Sals. It is
generally dry, but there are some water
XXX-33
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
sources. It would be interesting to know if
there was more water present in the canyon
during Archaic times.
excellent views of the sky that might have been
used for astronomical observation.
Representative Photo
Geological Strata
I noted the geological strata that each site
appears in. The Cutler, Moencopi and Chinle
appear only in lower Hell Roaring Canyon.
The remainder of the route moves in and out of
the Wingate, Kayenta, Navajo and Entrada
layers. I didn’t expect this data to reveal much
of interest, but, surprisingly, this information
yielded some of the most significant
conclusions. The data will be examined below
and detailed results will be presented.
Elevation
The elevation of each site was recorded. I got
the elevation from my GPS device, and I am
not too confident that it is a totally accurate
reading. The lowest elevation in the study area
is the Green River at about 4000 ft. The
highest elevation I recorded at a rock art site
was 5488 ft. Elevation did not seem to be a
significant factor regarding why sites were
chosen for rock art.
Attractions
I couldn’t think of a better name for this
category, but what I did here was make a
subjective judgment regarding why the site was
chosen for the creation of rock art. The most
common reasons I listed here were that the site
was along the trail, near water, in or near a
habitation site or a perfect rock surface for rock
art. Other comments included areas that are
ideal for agriculture, ledges that may have been
used for ceremonies or initiations, a wall that is
perfect for a billboard site that will be seen by
all passersby, and a few high sites that offered
XXX-34
For each site I printed a representative photo
onto the page with the data. The purpose of the
picture was to help me remember the site, so I
picked a photo with the most memorable
features. For example, the photo of the Moab
Panel in Figure 2 is only a small part of the
entire site, but it will quickly remind me of
what site the data is describing. Photos of the
entire site were included in my computer file
for the site.
III. DATA AND OBJECTIVE
CONCLUSIONS
Total Distance and Total Number of Sites
134 sites were found over a distance of 49
miles, so there are approximately 2.73 sites per
mile.
I got my distances by using National
Geographic software, and I expect that the
walking is not nearly so direct. The site
number of 134 is the number of sites that I
documented. I am sure that there are many
more sites that I never found. I tried to cover
both sides of the canyon, but often I only
looked closely at the areas that showed the
most promise. I went up a few side canyons,
but even in areas that had a high concentration
of rock art the side canyons usually had none.
Two exceptions were the branch of Mill Creek
known locally as Left Hand and a side canyon
in Lower Courthouse Wash. But there were
many side canyons that I didn’t have time to
investigate. I stayed almost exclusively in the
canyon bottoms. I investigated the benches in
a few areas and often found rock art, so there
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route may be more art on the benches that I didn’t
see. In all, I documented 25 panels on the
benches. Some bench areas I investigated
because I was told that there was rock art and
other areas because I thought that there should
be rock art. Of course, sites that were
originally made to be hidden or private weren’t
likely to be seen by me as I walked down the
middle of the canyon, so almost all of the 134
sites were originally meant to be seen by
people traveling this route. And time and
erosion have certainly destroyed many sites
over the years.
Canyons -- Mileage, Sites, Site Density
Table 1. Canyon Mileage, Site Count, Site Density
Canyons
Mileage
# of Sites
Site Density (per mile)
13.35
7
0.524
Total
10.75
14
1.3
Upper
3.28
1
0.3
Middle
4.0
13
3.25
Lower
2.2
0
Total
8.14
18
2.2
Upper
2.82
3
1.06
Lower
4.98
11
2.2
Mouth
.34
4
11.7
4.66
18
3.86
10.49
77
7.34
Hell Roaring / Dubinky/ Bartlett Wash
Seven Mile
0
Courthouse Wash
Moab Valley
(all sites are on the Moab Ledge)
Mill Creek
XXX-35
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
I measured each canyon segment in Table 1
separately using my map software, and the
segments don’t add up to exactly 49 miles, but
I don’t think the software and my manipulation
of it is accurate enough for that to happen.
There were some areas with little or no rock
art. The lower ten miles or so of Hell Roaring
Canyon had no sites, but there were few
appropriate rock surfaces and not much water.
I suspect that early travelers on the route were
doing what I found myself doing--moving
rather quickly to get to the next water source.
There is a three mile stretch in Mill Creek with
no rock art, but the rock in that stretch offers
no good surfaces, and if art had in fact been
present here, it would have quickly eroded
away. Lower Seven Mile Canyon and Upper
Courthouse Wash--the area where the trail
moves through the Entrada formation--had
great surfaces for rock art and lots of water, but
very little rock art. This is more of an enigma,
and I will discuss it more fully when I consider
geology.
Figure 8. Boulder site
The areas with the heaviest concentrations of
rock art were middle Seven Mile Canyon
(which had the highest concentration of
Archaic sites), the mouth of Courthouse Wash
and the lowest part of the canyon, Mill Creek
and the Moab Ledge (located on a bench on the
east side of the Moab Valley).
There were only two boulder sites (Figures 8
and 9). All remaining sites were on canyon
walls.
Figure 9. Boulder site
XXX-36
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route Geology -- Strata
Table 2. Geological Strata
Geological Strata
Total Length (miles)
% of the route from the Green River to
the south end of Mill Creek Canyon
Cutler/Moencopi/Chinle
7.26
14%
Wingate
7.4
14.3%
Kayenta
2.6
5%
Navajo
16.52
31.9%
Entrada
5.0
9.6%
4.86
9.4%
8.0
15.5%
Undifferentiated
Valley)
Open Country
(Moab
Table 2 shows the length of each geological
strata was present at or very near the canyon
floor and the percentage of the total route from
the Green River to Mill Creek for each of the
strata. I lumped the Cutler, Moencopi and
Chinle together because they only appear in
one place (lower Hell Roaring Canyon) and
there was only one rock art site in the area.
The Entrada also only appears in one stretch,
lower Seven Mile and Upper Courthouse
Wash. The Wingate, Kayenta and Navajo
formations appear in multiple places. The
route crosses the Moab Fault, which
complicates the geology. The open country
appears at the top of Island in the Sky, in upper
Seven Mile Canyon and as the route crosses
both Highway 191 and the highway in Arches
National Park that crosses Courthouse Wash. I
listed the Moab Valley as undifferentiated
because geologically the valley is a jumbled
mess caused by the collapse of a salt valley.
XXX-37
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
Geology -- Site Density and Percentage of Sites
Table 3. Site Density and Percentage of Sites
Geological Strata
Cutler/Moencopi/Chinle
Sites
Density
(sites per mile)
% of Sites
1
0.14
0.74
Wingate
10
1.35
7.4
Kayenta
10
3.84
7.4
Navajo
110
6.65
82.0
Entrada
3
0.6
2.2
Undifferentiated (Moab Valley)
0
0
0
Open Country
0
0
0
Table 3 shows the statistics for the density of
sites for each geological layer. The number
that jumps out immediately is the very high
density of sites in the Navajo. The low density
in the Cutler/Moencopi/Chinle segment can be
explained due to a large extent by the lack of
appropriate rock surfaces and lack of water
sources. But the low density of sites in the
Entrada is intriguing. The layer looks very
similar to the Navajo and is very well watered.
So why would the density be so high in the
Navajo and so low in the Entrada? The data
doesn’t tell us why, but I will speculate below
in the section of subjective conclusions.
Conclusion One: There is a disproportionately
high number of sites in the Navajo formation
and a disproportionately low number of sites in
the Entrada formation.
XXX-38
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route Content
Table 4. Content of the Rock Art in each Canyon
Hell
Roaring
Area
7 Mile
Courthouse
Moab
Ledge
Mill
Creek
Total
% of Sites
Total sites in canyon
7
14
18
18
77
134
Anthropomorphs
4
12
13
9
72
110
Sheep/quadrapeds
4
9
3
11
59
86
64.1
Snakes
2
3
2
10
33
50
37.3
Birds
0
2
1
0
0
3
Tracks
0
0
1
2
20
23
Flute players
0
0
0
0
5
5
0.04
Centipedes
0
1
0
0
1
2
0.014
Abstract elements
2
4
15
12
50
83
Table 4 indicates the number of sites that
contain at least one of the elements. They do
not indicate how many of each element are at
the site, only that there is at least one.
82
0.02
17.1
61.9
example of a complex panel that could be
discussed at great length.
Most of the quadrupeds are sheep, but I lumped
all quadrupeds together in one category. The
abstract category can be anything from dots,
circles and other geometrics to shapes that
seemed random, or possibly unfinished or
eroded figures.
Interpretation of a rock art site is difficult and
complex. To interpret just one site fully is the
subject of an entire essay. Figure 10 is an
Figure 10. An example of a very complex site.
There are many such sites in the study area.
XXXI-39
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
Rather than trying to take on the impossible
task of interpreting the complexities of 134
sites, I have simply gathered some basic data
regarding content based on motifs and how
often they appeared in each canyon. The
following discussion will look at each motif,
present examples and draw a few conclusions.
Figures 11-14 are examples
relatively undetailed torsos.
of
simple,
Anthropomorphs
Anthropomorphic figures were found in 82%
of the sites, 110 sites total. At most of these
sites, they dominate the imagery. It is easy to
say that the rock art of this area, of both the
Archaic and Formative periods, is oriented
towards humans and their activities. That may
seem obvious, but other rock art traditions are
not so human-oriented. For example, the cave
art of Europe is dominated by animal imagery
and humans are relatively rare. Here, however,
humans and their activities are the primary
concern of the artists. In my analysis of the
anthropomorphic images, I will look at art that
is characteristic of the archaic and formative
cultures, and also examine iconic and narrative
imagery.
Figure 11.
Conclusion Two: Rock art in the study area is
dominated by anthropomorphic imagery.
Archaic Anthropomorphs
Almost all of the Archaic rock art in the study
area is painted. The pictographs range from
relatively simple armless and legless torsos to
complex, detailed figures that are so far
removed from the human form that they can at
times be difficult to recognize as
anthropomorphic.
XXX-40
Figure 12.
Figures 11 and 12 are painted in red with the
wide shoulders and tapered torsos typical of
Barrier Canyon Style anthropomorphs. While
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route Horseshoe Canyon (formerly known as Barrier
Canyon) is not surveyed in this essay, it is a
part of the study area and will be examined
soon. I think the influence of the art of Barrier
Canyon, especially the Great Gallery, is present
throughout the entire route, although we will
not be able to fully understand who influenced
whom until we can reliably date the artwork.
Figures 15 and 16 are details of the panel
shown in Figure 4.
Figure 13.
Figure 15.
Figure 15 is a limbless torso with indistinct
stripes in the torso most likely created with
fingers. Prominent are the large, vacant eyes.
Figure 14.
Figure 13 shows a variety of faded Barrier
Style figures with no ornamentation. Figure 14
is decorated with dots on the shoulders, but is
otherwise a typical Barrier Canyon Style
anthropomorph with an armless, legless,
tapered torso.
Figure 16 has much more detail in the torso
and a t-shaped head that bears very little
resemblance to anything human. These figures
are from a panel dated at two thousand years
old, as late Archaic, yet they are very different
from the formative anthropomorphs that we
will see in the next section.
XXX-41
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
represents a comet. I have no idea what the
comet-like shape represents, but its shape and
colors add movement to the arrangement.
Figure 16.
Other anthropomorphs presumed to be archaic
show much more detail and complexity.
The panel is executed in red, yellow and white
pigments, although the yellow is very faded.
The central, dominant figure is very detailed
with hands and feet that are very different from
one another. The snake is right above the head.
The anthropomorph on the left is armless and
has a t-shaped head, making it appear much
less human-like than the central figure. The
two shapes on the right are barely
anthropomorphic, but one clearly has eyes.
Otherwise their only anthropomorphic
characteristic is that they are tall and thin. The
sheep on the right is positioned like animals in
other panels that are interpreted to be shaman’s
animal helpers. The shamanic interpretation
would help make sense of the otherworldly,
nonhuman appearance of this and other
Archaic panels. This is nothing close to a
realistic depiction of our human world. It is
something from another world, possibly
experienced in an altered state of
consciousness.
Figure 18 is another carefully arranged Archaic
pictograph panel.
Figure 17.
Figure 17 is a carefully arranged group of four
anthropomorphic figures, a sheep, a snake and
a curved abstract shape that some people think
XXX-42
Under a rain cloud are two anthropomorphs,
two snakes, a bird and three parallel, vertical
lines. The anthropomorph on the left has a
head that looks more like a plant to me,
something like a prickly pear. The dominant
anthropomorph in the center looks more
human, and in his (or her) one arm holds a bird.
A closer look (Figure 19) reveals eyes painted
in blue and a snake in the large mouth area.
The bird is very human-like in structure, with
only the feather-like marks on its arms
indicating that it is a bird. In this panel we have
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route seen how the Archaic anthropomorph can in
fact stray very far from human representation
into something that is more the creation of a
human mind than a representation of anything
in the empirical world.
presents us with mysterious cultural
information that we would be hard pressed to
examine adequately with empirical data. The
Intestine Man (Figure 20), as mentioned above,
may not be either a man or a depiction of
intestines.
Figure 18.
Figure 20. The Intestine Man
(detail of Figure 3)
Figure 19. Detail of Figure 18
A close look at one more panel of archaic
anthropomorphs will take us a step further
from representational art, by which I mean art
that attempts to realistically portray things seen
in the natural world. The Intestine Man panel
(Figure 3) features three anthropomorphs that
bear little resemblance to humans, but it
The intestines in the torso could just as easily
be snakes. Of course, metaphorically both
could be represented. We all contain a gut full
of snakes. The arms are upright, as arms might
be, but they show little resemblance to real
arms. The left arm (right in the photo) is
connected to the “intestines” and appears to be
a part of them that extends upward outside of
the body. The other arm is attached to the
outside of the body. The lower body, where
XXX-43
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
you might expect to see legs, has something
else altogether. It could be dress-like clothing
or even feathers, but it doesn’t bear much
resemblance to anything anthropomorphic.
The head appears to have been damaged by
erosion, but what is left bears little resemblance
to a head. So with all of these traits, is this
really an anthropomorph exhibiting intestines?
It’s difficult to say, but this is a good example
of how far from representational art the archaic
artist could stray.
The figure on the right (Figure 21) is also
intriguing.
hint that this person is wearing a robe or some
garment that covers most of the legs. The
arms, however, are replaced by outlines of
wings, each of which has a stalk of some kind
of vegetation sticking into it from below.
Above each wing, flying creatures move away
from the head in opposite directions. If they
are birds, they would have to be
hummingbirds, but I think they are probably
wasps or hornets. What are we to make of
this? It’s hard to say, but it appears to involve
plants, wings and insects.
The third anthropomorph (Figure 22) is another
enigmatic image.
Figure 21. Another detail of Figure 3
The head, which looks more like a head this
time, has four groups of parallel lines
extending from it. The very short legs could
XXX-44
Figure 22. Another detail of Figure 3
Again, the legs are very short with feet that
appear to end in four claws. One foot has
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route snake-like lines around it. There appears to be
a tail between the legs. The torso has three
parallel lines crossing it in two different places,
possibly a pattern on clothing. The head is
completely missing. A strand of something
(vegetation, an animal’s detached tail?)
represented by three parallel lines is draped
over the top of the figure. On one side are
more of the insects or birds. On the other side
what appeared to me at first to be a bird turned
out upon closer examination to be some sort of
creature, possibly even the body of a bird,
crossed by a snake. I originally thought that
the snake was thin wings attached to the body.
On the far right side of Figure 3, there is
another of the same type of creature that is
larger. Again, we are left with little idea of
what is actually being depicted here. The
Archaic artist(s) responsible for the creation of
this panel were certainly not painting a
naturalistic portrait of the world around them.
The theory that these images are the result of
shamanistic altered states of consciousness is
certainly possible. Regardless, these images
are highly imaginative.
Formative Anthropomorphs
The anthromorphs from the Formative era
panels are noticeably different from those of
the earlier Archaic era. There are a few
pictographs (Figures 23 and 24), but the vast
majority of the images are petroglyphs.
Figure 23.
In summary, Archaic anthropomorphs are
almost always pictographs. They range from
relatively simple limbless, tapering torsos to
highly complex, detailed depictions of
imaginative creatures that bear little
resemblance to anything in the natural world.
As we shall see in the next section, Formative
anthropomorphs from the study area are very
different from the Archaic in many respects.
Conclusion Three: Archaic anthropomorphs
are usually pictographs that are nonrepresentational in nature.
Figure 24.
XXX-45
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
Most of the anthropomorphs are silhouettes,
rather stiff and static (Figures 25 and 26).
their everyday guise. They are probably
dressed for ceremonial occasions or are
perhaps depictions of supernatural beings. A
few of the petroglyphs have details inside the
torso, usually of jewelry or other decoration
(Figures 27 and 28), but most do not.
Figure 27.
Figure 25.
Figure 26.
Elaborate headgear, as shown in Figure 26, is
common. These are not depictions of people in
XXX-46
Figure 28.
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route A few are depictions of heads (Figures 29 and
30), but most are full bodies, sometimes with
weapons or tools (Figure 31).
Figure 29. Simple outlines of heads
Figure 31. Formative anthropomorph with
shield and possibly a spear or atlatl.
Figure 30. Eyes, nose, mouth and antlers.
Perhaps painted pigment has disappeared over
the years.
Figure 32 appears to show the type of hair
whorls that unmarried Hopi women wore in
historic times.
Others are more difficult to interpret. Figure
33 shows either a three-headed person or uses
perspective to show three people standing in a
group, all facing forward.
Figure 32.
XXX-47
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
Figure 33.
Figure 34 uses natural stains in the rock to
augment the composition.
Stains appear
between the legs and between each of the arms
and the body.
Figure 35.
Figure 34.
Figure 35 has a huge right hand and right foot
and a head ornament.
Of course, most
anthropomorphs don’t appear in isolation from
other petroglyphs. Figures 36 and 37 show
pairs of anthropomorphs that are obviously
meant to relate to one another.
XXX-48
Figure 36. Note the differences in feet
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route study area are dominated by anthropomorphic
imagery, we will use anthropomorphs as
examples of these types of images.
Figure 37.
Many panels have complex arrangements of
figures (Figures 38 and 39).
Figure 39. A complex panel with a variety of
anthromorphs, sheep and a track.
Figure 38. A complex panel located on a
ledge
We will
look at panels with narrative
characteristics in the next section. For now, we
can summarize our look at Formative
anthropomorphs.
Conclusion Four: Formative anthropomorphs
are usually petroglyphs in silhouette with little
detail.
Iconic and Narrative Imagery
Any type of imagery could be found in iconic
or narrative settings, but since the panels in the
In Art of the Warriors James Keyser defines
iconic imagery:
“Drawn as individuals or
small groups of figures, iconic
images are static, showing
neither
movement
nor
interaction, and not depicting
real life events.” (60)
Most of the anthropomorphs in the study area
seem to me to fit into this iconic category.
Narrative images are more active and
interactive. Keyser again:
“[Narrative imagery] depicts
real people interacting in
everyday events.”
XXX-49
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
With this definition he is referring to the
Biographic Tradition of the Great Plains. I
think Keyser’s definition fits well with the
imagery in my study area, except for the word
“everyday.” Many of the narrative panels in
the study seem to be referring to ceremonial
events or even to scenes that may have been
witnessed in the altered states of consciousness
of shamanic activities. Let’s look first at iconic
anthropomorphs.
Figure 41. A group of iconic anthropomorphs
Iconic Anthropomorphs
Iconic images are static and are not interacting.
Figures 40 and 41 are examples of iconic
Formative anthropomorphs.
Figure 40. Static outlines of Formative era
anthropomorphs
XXX-50
Figures 11, 12 and 13 would be examples of
iconic Archaic anthropomorphs.
In both
Figures 42 and 43, the anthropomorphs are
static, facing forward and lacking action. What
was the intended purpose of iconic imagery? It
is difficult to say, but many of these images
retain their power today. Figure 42 is the
famous Moab Man, found on the Moab Man
panel, one of the two public sites in the study
area. It is indeed possible that it may once
have been part of a narrative panel, but most of
the panel has spalled off over the years and we
are left with an iconic image. The Moab Man
still has his charisma. He is a featured image
used by Moab businesses and events to give
them an image both local and exotic. It
probably helps that he is located just off the
14th hole of the Moab Golf Course, where he
has cheered on many a double bogey.
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route Figure 44.
Figure 42. The still iconic Moab Man
Figures 43 and 44 are two more iconic images,
each holding what appears to be a similar piece
of equipment. One has a triangular head or hat;
the other has a flat head and horns.
Figure 43.
Anthropomorphs in Narrative Settings
It is very difficult to communicate narrative in
a visual image. Painting is not a temporal art
like music or literature. A painting can only
give a snapshot of one moment in a narrative
sequence. Part of the mystique is wondering
what happened before and what will happen
after the scene we see. Consider that the rock
art we are examining was made hundreds of
years ago by a culture that was radically
different from ours, and the mystique increases
dramatically. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if
ancient peoples had left millions of videos on
some primitive version of YouTube that we
could study? But they didn’t, and we are left
with enigmatic snippets of narrative scenes that
give us some cultural information, but
invariably pose more questions for us than they
answer. Remember that narrative images show
action and interaction.
We will begin with hunting scenes. Hunting
scenes comprise a minority of the narrative
XXX-51
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
panels, but still they are not rare. Figure 45
shows an antlered bow hunter in a scene with
three more anthropomorphs and a line of sheep.
Figure 46 is a very complex hunting scene with
a large central quadruped, probably a bear, and
a multitude of other figures, including two bow
hunters and a man with a spear or possibly an
atlatl in the upper left hand corner (Figure 47).
Figure 47. Detail of Figure 46. A man with
an atlatl or spear takes aim.
Other narrative panels involve ceremonial
events or at least social events. Many panels
show lines of people holding hands (Figures 48
and 49), and animated flute players provide
music for the occasion (Figures 50 and 51).
Figure 45.
Figure 48. A group holding hands,
presumably for a dance
Figure 46. A complex hunting scene
Figure 49. Another group of dancers,
accompanied by two large snakes
XXX-52
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route Figure 52. Backpackers
Figure 50. Two flute players
Is it a ceremony, the depiction of a myth, a
dream? It is very difficult to know with any
certainty, but clearly something is going on.
One last narrative image (Figure 53) located in
a notch high above the canyon floor, shows
another complex scene.
Again, people,
animals and geometric designs are composed
into a portrayal of some ceremony or event.
The scene shows action and interaction.
Figure 51. Another flute player, obviously
having a good time
The study area contained only one group of
backpackers (Figure 52).
Some narrative scenes are very complex.
Figure 10 contains many rows of
anthropomorphs, animals both large and small,
a flute player on his back, and many abstract,
geometrical lines and shapes that all seem to be
a part of one carefully composed arrangement.
Figure 53.
XXX-53
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
To summarize, anthropomorphs are the
dominant content in the rock art in the study
area, appearing at 82% of the sites. The
anthropomorphs depicted show a great deal of
variety.
They are rarely representational;
instead they seem to express iconic and
symbolic concepts. Rather than depicting the
outer world, they show the inner world of
imagination.
a high notch, is quite large and is meant to be
seen from the canyon floor. Figure 56 is an
unusual naturalistic depiction of sheep grazing
on a hillside. The hillside just beyond the
panel could have provided the scene.
Quadrupeds
After anthropomorphs, quadrupeds are the next
most common type of image, appearing at 64%
of the sites. By far sheep are the most common
quadrupeds, although many other types of
animals are depicted. We will begin by
looking at images of sheep from both the
Archaic and the Formative eras.
Sheep are far less common in Archaic panels
than they are in Formative panels. There is a
single sheep pictograph on the right side of
Figure 17. Figure 54 shows a detail from the
TV Sheep panel. These boxy sheep are an
example of Glen Canyon Style No. 5,
identified by Christy Turner and dated to the
Basketmaker III Culture, 500-700 A.D. (9)
Figure 55. An iconic sheep
Figure 56. Grazing sheep
Some sheep show action. Figure 57 shows a
sheep in motion, and Figure 58 shows a line of
sheep that could almost be said to be dancing.
The sheep on the far right is raised up on hind
legs.
Figure 54. Detail of the TV Sheep panel
Petroglyphs of sheep are much more common
on panels from the Formative cultures. Figure
55 shows an iconic sheep. This one, located in
XXX-54
Sheep can also have symbolic content. In one
case, a line departing from a sheep’s horn coils
into a spiral (Figure 59). Another panel shows
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route what are probably sheep emerging from a crack
in the rock (Figure 60).
deer. Since he (or she) has no weapon, I
assume that this is not a hunting scene.
Figure 57. A sheep in motion
Figure 60. Quadrupeds appear to be emerging
from a crack
Figure 58.
Figure 61.
Figure 62 shows a large elk.
Its size
dominates the panel, which also includes sheep
and people without weapons.
Figure 59.
Other quadrupeds appear in the study area, but
not as often as sheep. Deer and elk are not
uncommon and other animals, sometimes
difficult to identify, appear as well. Figure 61
shows a horned anthropomorph with a group of
Bear tracks are commonly depicted (tracks will
be looked at more closely below), but bears
themselves are rare. Figure 63 is a detail of
Figure 47. It appears to be a large, complex
hunting scene, with the bear the central figure.
Bears, like deer and elk, are common in the
study area, and
even today bears will
occasionally roam through Mill Creek in the
study area.
XXX-55
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
Figure 64. Horned quadruped. The biped is
Ryan Anderson of Moab
Figure 62.
Figure 65. A fox
Figure 63.
And last, some quadrupeds are clearly not
creatures that are found in the natural world.
Figure 66 shows a creature whose tail is a large
spiral.
Figure 64 shows a nearly life-sized horned
quadruped that is abraded onto the wall of an
alcove..
There is one fox clearly depicted (Figure 65) in
a panel that appears to date from the late
Archaic. It is interesting to note that canines
are fairly common in Archaic era panels, but
relatively rare in Formative era panels.
Figure 66.
XXX-56
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route Snakes
Snakes appear at 50 sites, 37% of the sites in
the study area. They are common in both
Archaic and Formative panels. They are not
depicted in naturalistic settings, and most likely
they were not a part of the hunting culture.
Armless and legless and as quick as lightning,
the snake has a potent bite and arises a very
primal fear in many people. When I lived on
the Navajo reservation, I found that Navajos
were almost unanimously afraid of snakes,
which they equated with lightning. When
snakes appear in rock art panels, they usually
seem to me to be there for symbolic reasons.
Snakes can be long and undulating (Figures 67
and 68) or coiled (Figures 69 and 70). Some
snakes almost become random meanders
(Figure 71).
Figure 69. A coiled snake, or is it a spiral with
a loose end?
Figure 70. A coiled snake
Figure 67. An undulating snake, at least 15
feet long
Figure 68. This snake was made with three
lines instead of the usual two.
Figure 71. A meandering snake with two
more conventional snakes
XXX-57
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
Vertical snakes also appear, as if they are rising
up from the ground (Figure 72).
The horned serpent appears occasionally
(Figure 74).
Figure 74. A horned serpent
The Snake in Mouth panel (Figure 18) shows a
large snake that seems to be moving towards
the head of the main anthropomorph, but a
detail (Figure 75) shows where the panel gets
its name. Here the symbolic nature of the
snake is obvious. The snake is an easy
metaphor for the tongue, as here, or for
lightning or intestines (Figure 3).
Figure 72. Several vertical snakes
Snakes often approach the abstract, and Figure
73 could be a rattlesnake or simply an
undulating line crossed by shorter lines at the
end.
Figure 75. Detail of the Snake in Mouth panel
Centipedes
Figure 73.
XXX-58
Like the snake, the centipede is a squirmy thing
with a surprisingly potent bite. Only two
panels in the study area depict centipedes, but
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route in both cases, the centipede is a featured image
at the panel (Figures 76 and 77).
Figure 76. A centipede at an Archaic site
Figure 78.
Tracks
Figure 77. Two centipedes at a Formative site
Birds
There are few depictions of birds. Only three
sites in the study area contain images of birds.
Two are on Archaic era panels, but one of
those, the Intestine Man site, might well depict
flying insects, not birds (Figure 21). The other,
the Snake in Mouth site, has a bird/human
figure standing on the hand of the central
character (Figure 19). Only one Formative era
site has a bird image (Figure 78), which
appears to be a heron or some sort of shore
bird.
Tracks appear in 17% of the sites. Tracks of
humans and bears are most common, but other
types appear as well. Many of the tracks are
stylized in design, and it is difficult to be sure
what animal’s tracks are being depicted. All of
the sites with tracks are from the Formative
era. Figures 79 and 80 each have more than
one kind of track, and Figure 81 shows sandal
prints and a bear track carved on the top of a
rock.
Abstract
The abstract category is a bit of a catch all
category. Some of the images were put here
because I could not relate them to any
representational category. Abstract elements
appeared at 62% of the sites.
XXX-59
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
For this discussion I will ignore abstract
elements that could be unfinished or eroded
images, along with meandering lines, and focus
on images that seem to have been made
intentionally by the artist. I will begin with an
image that might very well be a blanket (Figure
82). If it is a blanket, of course, it is not an
abstract image, but it would also be the only
image of a blanket in the study area. Figure 83
might also have some relation to textiles, or it
could just be an abstract design.
Figure 79.
Figure 82.
Figure 80.
Figure 83.
Figure 81.
XXX-60
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route Figure 84 looks like it could be a stylized
depiction of something plant-like or snake-like,
but it could also be an elaborate geometric
design that had some meaning to the artist.
Figure 85 could also be a snake-like image or
an image from a pottery design.
Figure 86 has what many people call a rake at
the top of the panel. This is almost certainly
not a rake-like tool. It could be a stylized
depiction of a rain cloud, or it could just be a
geometric design.
Figure 86.
Figure 84.
Figure 87 is a design of dots.
Figure 85.
Figure 87.
XXX-61
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
This appears to be an Archaic panel because of
the heavy repatination and the fact that there
are some much lighter Formative era images on
the same rock surface a few feet away. Dots
were found more often on Archaic panels than
on Formative panels.
stylized the sun or the stars the same way that
we do.
Figures 88 and 89 are circular designs. Could
they be Ute shield figures? Possibly, but these
images and several others like them are found
on high ledges that have an excellent view of
the western sky. It seemed to me that they
might be stations for astronomical observation.
If so, these images might have something to do
with astronomical symbols.
Figure 90.
Figures 91 and 92 both feature round geometric
shapes with small lines around the edge.
Figure 88.
Figure 91.
Figure 92 also has handprints and is clearly
meant to symbolize something, but it is very
difficult to say exactly what.
Figure 89.
Figure 90 is an image that we might associate
with a star or the sun, but there is no reason to
assume that ancient Native American cultures
XXX-62
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route Figure 92.
Figure 94. The left side of the panel shown in
Figure 93
I will close this section on abstract elements by
showing an entire complex panel that features
abstraction, mainly lines, in its content. Figure
93 shows the entire panel, which is very
difficult to photograph straight on because the
ground below the panel slopes sharply down.
Figure 95. The right side of the panel shown
in Figure 93
Summary
Figure 93. A huge panel dominated by
abstract elements
Figures 94 and 95 show each side of the panel
closer up. Interpretation of this panel could
probably fill a book. The patterns of lines give
the impression of a city road map, which is
certainly not the intention. The lines are
definitely not random and are an integral part
of the overall design. The point, I suppose, is
that many abstract elements probably have a
great deal of meaning, but the meaning is lost
to us.
This long section on content has simply been a
look at the different types of images that appear
in the study area. Interpretation of 134 entire
panels, which would certainly be of value, is
beyond the scope of this essay. I will comment
on how panels are related to each other in
Section IV.
XXX-63
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
Data and Notes by Canyon
Seven Mile
Table 6. Seven Mile
Tables 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 summarize the data and
notes by canyon.
Hell Roaring/Dubinky/Bartlett Wash
Table 5. Hell Roaring/Dubinky/Bartlett Wash
Upper
3.28
1
0.3
Middle
4.0
13
3.25
Lower
2.2
0
Total
10.75
14
Geology
Miles
Sites
Navajo
0.94
0
0
Kayenta
0.86
1
1.16
Wingate
4.0
13
3.25
Open land
(Moab
Fault)--
2.18
0
0
Entrada
2.2
0
0
Segment
Miles
Sites
Total
13.35
7
Sites
Density
(Sites/Mile)
0.524
Density
(Sites/Mile)
Geology
Miles
Cutler
Moencopi
Chinle
7.0
Wingate
3.68
1
Kayenta
0.1
2
20
Open land
with
Navajo
outcrops
6.0
3
2
1
14
in upper
Chinle,
Rock Art
1.5
Sites
Pictographs only
1
Pictographs and petroglyphs
2
Petroglyphs only
4
Archaic rock art
3 all BCS
Formative rock art
6
Miles
Sites
Density
(Sites/Mile)
Segment
Rock Art
0
1.3
Density
(Sites/Mile)
Sites
Pictographs only
7
Petroglyphs only
6
Archaic rock art--
8
Formative rock art
6
Notes: Seven Mile
Elevation of sites 4574-5021
Notes: Hell Roaring/Dubinky/Bartlett Wash:
Elevation of sites 4435-5178
All sites were meant to be seen by passersby.
4 sites in habitation area, 3 along trails
XXX-64
In middle Seven Mile, there are five sites that
appear to have been created at habitation sites.
There are two impressive sites away from the
trail that may have had some sort of ceremonial
significance.
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route Notes: Seven Mile (continued)
Notes: Courthouse Wash
High percentage of Archaic sites.
Elevation of sites 4093-4216
Preference for Wingate; aversion to Entrada.
Surprising lack of sites in Entrada
More pictographs than petroglyphs.
Habitation sites throughout Lower Courthouse
Middle Seven Mile feels very lived in.
Primarily formative sites.
One site is a marker for where the trail leaves
the canyon to skirt around a pour off.
5 sites near the mouth of the canyon are up
high in the Navajo even though there are good
Kayenta surfaces at canyon level. The view of
the western horizon from these sites is possibly
important for astronomical observation
Courthouse Wash
Table 7. Courthouse Wash
Segment
Miles
Sites
Density
(Sites/Mile)
Upper
2.82
3
1.06
Lower
4.98
11
2.2
Mouth
0.34
4
11.7
Total
8.14
18
2.2
Geology
Miles
Sites
Entrada
2.82
3
1.06
Navajo
3.04
11
3.61
Kayenta
1.67
4
2.39
Rock Art
Moab Valley/Moab Ledge
Table 8. Moab Valley/Moab Ledge
Segment
Miles
Sites
Total
4.66
(valley
bottom
from the
Colorado
River to
the Mill
Creek
Canyon
entrance).
18 (all
located
far
above
the
valley
on
Moab
Ledge)
Geology
Miles
Sites
Undifferentiated
in Moab
Valley
4.66
0
Navajo -Moab
Ledge is
above the
valley on
the east
rim.
3.98
18
Density
(Sites/Mile)
Sites
Pictographs only
4
Pictographs and petroglyphs
2
Petroglyphs only
12
Archaic rock art
3
Formative rock art
13
Ute rock art
2
Density
(Sites/Mile)
3.86
Density
(Sites/Mile)
0
4.5
XXX-65
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
Table 8. Moab Valley/Moab Ledge
(continued)
Mill Creek
Table 9. Mill Creek
Rock Art
Sites
Segment
Miles
Sites
17
Total
10.49
77
Formative rock art
17
Geology
Miles
Sites
Fake rock art of recent origin
1
(the
pictograph
site)
Pictographs only
1
Petroglyphs only
Navajo
10.49
throughout
canyon
77
Density
(Sites/Mile)
7.34
Density
(Sites/Mile)
7.34
Notes: Moab Valley/Moab Ledge
Elevation of sites 4677-4482
The fake site is white handprints that are very
large and poorly made.
All other sites are formative time period and
petroglyphs.
Noticeable consistency in content. (anthros,
quads, snakes, abstract)
Rock Art
Sites
Pictographs only
1
Pictographs and petroglyphs
3
Petroglyphs only
73
Archaic rock art
3
All sites are on Navajo cliff, even though it is
far above valley floor.
Formative rock art
All sites have an excellent view of the western
sky and the western rim of the Moab Valley.
Notes: Mill Creek
77 all
Elevation--4384-5488
All sites have Formative rock art, only 3 have
Archaic.
Habitation sites throughout the canyon.
All but one site has petroglyphs.
Anthropomorphs present at 72 of 77 sites.
Five sites have flute players, but one of these
has 16 flute players.
All sites are in the Navajo, which is present at
stream level throughout the canyon.
There is abundant water throughout the
canyon.
No depictions of birds
One boulder site
XXX-66
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route IV. SUBJECTIVE CONCLUSIONS
BASED ON THE EXPERIENCE OF
HIKING THE ROUTE
Unfortunately, the large group of images that
we viewed in the section on content comes
across more like a catalog from an art
exhibition than an experience of rock art in its
native setting. The intention of my project was
to hike the length of the route and experience
the rock art sites as people did in the past.
Often my research felt more like me-search. I
was always searching for rock art sites, and I
was also taking inventory of my experience
and how it might shed light on my
interpretation of the rock art.
Rock art studies often focus on why rock art
was made and on isolated images shown as
pictures in publications. In this section I want
to put more emphasis on the audience for rock
art and how they may have been affected by it.
Rock art serves to both explain and map the
landscape. Location must have had great
importance. In The Figured Landscape of
Rock Art Chippendale and Nash make a
profound statement regarding the importance
of location in rock art studies: .
“The insecurity of time
[dating] is compensated for
by security in place.” (7)
In this section, I will draw some general
conclusions based on both my statistics and on
experiencing the rock art in place. These aren’t
scientific conclusions based on an empirical
approach, but perhaps they could provide a
theoretical framework that might be
investigated empirically in the future.
1. The Trail
Did any of the rock art sites appear to be trail
markers, boundary markers or anything of the
sort? Of course, the many billboard-type
panels were meant to be seen by all passersby,
but only one panel seemed to have significance
in relation to the trail. When I hiked down
Seven Mile Canyon from the top of Island In
The Sky, I was surprised to find that my hiking
partners and I were stopped by a huge pour-off
in the upper part of the canyon. We continued
to hike along the canyon rim, but it was
beginning to look like we might not ever be
able to get back to the canyon floor. A branch
of Seven Mile was coming in on our left, and
with the main canyon on our right, we were
approaching a point that looked too sheer to
descend. I was beginning to think that my idea
of a migratory route through the canyon might
be all wrong. When we got to the sheer point I
looked down and immediately recognized
where we were. A couple of rock art sites that
I had already visited by driving and hiking up
Seven Mile were in the area below us. I looked
to the right and saw an area that might offer a
chance to descend, so we headed that way.
When we got there the trail was obvious--a
well worn route that at first went down through
a wide crack and then out onto slick rock
benches that were easy to negotiate. I knew we
had found the old route, but as we came out
onto the first slick rock bench I was very
surprised to see that we were face to face with
a large red anthropomorph that I had only seen
before from the canyon bottom (Figure 12). It
showed up better from above that it does from
below. It seemed to me to be clearly associated
with the trail, something that I never would
have known if I had not hiked the route. I
don’t mean to say that it was a trail marker,
because you had to already be on your descent
XXX-67
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
before you would see it. But I think it was
associated with the trail and the descent,
possibly as a greeting, a warning, a blessing, or
something of the sort. So, to answer the
question that this paragraph began with, I do
think that some panels, but not too many, were
designed to provide information to those
traveling the route.
Conclusion Five: Some sites were designed to
provide some sort of information to travelers
on the migratory route.
cultures, but it must be remembered that one
transitioned into the other, and the Archaic
culture’s iconography was, and still is, ever
present in the canyons. So, is there evidence in
the panels of artists being influenced by panels
that they had seen? I will present three
examples here of such influence.
An image of an armless torso with vertical
striping topped by a t-shaped head appears in
Hell Roaring Canyon and again in Seven Mile,
about eight miles away along the route (Figures
96 and 97).
Influence from One Panel to Another
I also wondered if it were possible that panels
were related to each other in some kind of
order, like chapters in a book or lessons to be
learned in a sequence. That seemed unlikely,
because the panels didn’t seem to be made at
the same time. In fact, I didn’t find any
evidence that panels were related in this kind of
way. They each had their own content and
didn’t seem be related.
Conclusion Six: The rock art along the route
showed no evidence of being related
sequentially by content.
There was, however, evidence of another kind
of influence from panel to panel. I couldn’t
help but notice how the body of rock art built
up over time. At first there would have only
been canyon, and then the first Archaic panels
were made. If current scientific dating is
accurate, the Great Gallery was one of the
earliest sites, and what an influence that would
have had on all who later traveled the route!
We tend to separate Archaic and Formative
XXX-68
Figure 96. Seven Mile Canyon
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route image in a petroglyph panel about 37 miles
away in Mill Creek (Figure 99).
Figure 97. Hell Roaring Canyon
Are these meant to be representations of the
same supernatural character, or did seeing the
image in one location inspire the artist in the
other location to paint a similar image? It’s
impossible to say, but these are the only two
images of their type along the route, and I can’t
help but think that ancient audiences in the
canyons would have seen them as similar and
linked the two sites in their minds because of
this.
The main figure in the large alcove in Hell
Roaring Canyon, the so-called Comet Catcher
(Figure 98), appeared to me to be a very unique
Archaic anthropomorph. I had never seen
anything like it in the study area or anywhere
else. But I came across a remarkably similar
Figure 98. Hell Roaring
Other images in the petroglyph panel seem to
be from the Formative period.
Is the
petroglyph meant to be a copy of the Hell
Roaring pictograph? If so, the Archaic rock art
was influencing the Formative petroglyphs that
came later.
Another example of Archaic rock art possibly
influencing Formative petroglyphs occurs in
Seven Mile canyon (Figure 100).
XXX-69
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
What especially caught my interest here are the
people to the right of the Barrier Canyon Style
figure who are bent over and have a staff or
stick in their hands. They are not common, but
I knew I had seen something like them before.
When I looked at a photo of a panel from the
San Rafael Swell, I found similar images
(Figure 101).
Figure 99. Mill Creek
Figure 101. An Archaic panel with
anthropomorphs or zoomorphs (far left) bent
over with staffs, similar to those in Figure 100.
Figure 100. A Barrier Canyon Style
anthropomorph in a petroglyph panel that
includes images that are characteristic of both
the Archaic and Formative periods.
XXX-70
The panel in the Swell is not in the study area
and is far from Seven Mile Canyon, but these
are the only two panels that I have seen with
this motif. It is possible, of course, that the
artist at one panel had seen the other, but it is
also possible that both artists were depicting
the same sort of ritual or event and produced
the same image independent of one another. Is
the panel in Seven Mile a Formative panel that
has been influenced by Archaic imagery? It is
also quite possible that the Seven Mile panel
was made in the transitional period between the
Archaic and Formative and includes imagery
from both periods. Accurate scientific dating
of this petroglyph panel could help answer
some of the questions that arise here.
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route Conclusion Seven: There seems to be
influence from one panel to another, both from
place to place and from one time period to
another.
The rock art suggests that there was cultural
continuity through time. The older rock art
was always present for those who came later,
just as it still is today, and even if later people
didn’t interpret it the same way as their
ancestors did, it still may have had an
influence. Earlier rock art was always present
to those traveling this route, and it provided a
continuity in how the landscape was
experienced.
In his recent book on Fremont rock art, Steven
Simms makes a similar point:
“Rock art is one element of a
Fremont ‘social geography.’
It offers a glimpse of the
agency of individuals who did
not act alone but were instead
part of a social fabric that for
the Fremont included a
worldview that extended
beyond the household and the
family. Nor is rock art just
about the makers and
meaning it held for them.
This is because rock art
remains meaningful on time
scales that transcend the lives
of individuals. Instead the
initial intent fades and the
importance of the maker
diminishes as future users and
caretakers
construct
the
meaning of rock art for their
own times. Rock art does not
passively reflect a meaning,
but is a vehicle used to
construct meaning as history
proceeds.” (103)
Simms is making the point that rock art
remains meaningful and relevant through time,
even when the intent of the original artist has
been lost. It is a part of the experienced
landscape.
Simms again:
“. . .landscape and place were
important to shaping the
production of Fremont rock
art, and that those places
remained spiritualized
for
centuries
because
of
continuity in heritage and
worldview.” (108)
The point made here is that through rock art,
particular places were given a special status
that they retained through time. I felt the same
thing as I traveled through the canyons: rock
art imbued power to places that would have
been experienced by all subsequent audiences
who experienced the art, even if they saw it
differently from the people who made it.
2. A World of Rock
In compiling my data for this project, I
probably walked over 150 miles in canyons. It
became obvious to me that to the people who
lived in these canyons, their world was a world
of rock. When we walk through the canyons,
we walk in worlds of biology and geology, but
to native people the canyons were, and still are,
highly spiritualized.
With our scientific
outlook, we don’t give much thought to what
goes on inside of rock, but to native people the
XXX-71
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
world of rock was not as inert as we see it. In
his discussion of the highly shamanistic rock
art of California, David Whitley describes how
the Indians of California viewed their world of
rock:
“. . . ‘entering a cave’ or rock
was a metaphor for a
shaman’s
altered
state;
therefore, caves (and rocks
more
generally)
were
considered
entrances
or
portals to the supernatural
world.
This was because
rocks were considered to be
numinous; that is inhabited by
supernatural beings.” (80)
“This reflects the belief that
power lies inside rocks and
that by piercing the stone veil
between the natural and the
supernatural
worlds,
an
individual can gain power.”
(100)
Whitley bases his ideas on native Californian
ethnography as well as on the rock art. While
we don’t have ethnographical resources for the
Archaic and Formative periods, we can see
evidence of many rock art panels that show
images that are going into or coming out of
cracks. Figure 61 is an example, and the
famous Holy Ghost group at the Great Gallery
appears to show anthropomorphs emerging out
of the rock. Rock art is often found in alcoves
that place it inside of the natural surface of the
cliff. Rock art is located on the interface of the
inner, spiritualized world of rock and the outer
world of daily life. In altered states of
consciousness, shamans could enter cracks or
XXX-72
caves that opened up into the supernatural
world.
So what should we make of this? To me, the
implication is that much of the rock art we see
is an expression of things related to the
spiritual world of the ancient people of these
canyons. Their spiritual world was located in
the landscape that surrounded them. It was not
a Sunday morning thing; it was their 24/7
existence. What we think of as supernatural
they thought of as natural. After all, the people
in rock art are referred to a anthropomorphs
because they have some characteristics of
humans but also many characteristics that are
non-human or supernatural. This spiritualized
landscape transcends our rational, humanoriented and science-oriented world view. It
was the dwelling place of the ancient people
who made this rock art. The art is an
expression of their interaction with a landscape
that they saw very differently than we do.
Conclusion Eight: Rock is not just a
convenient canvas for the creation of rock art.
It is also an integral part of the spiritual world
of native cultures, and this view of the spiritual
nature of rock influenced the native artists.
Earlier I showed statistics that demonstrated
that ancient artists had showed a preference for
the Navajo sandstone and an apparent aversion
to the Entrada sandstone. I was surprised at
this conclusion, and I felt it indicated an
awareness among cultures of the different
geological layers. This should have been
obvious--they lived in a world of rock and
probably understood it in ways that we have no
awareness of. I asked both Pueblo and Navajo
people how their cultures interpreted
geological layers and got similar answers: the
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route layers reflect the creations of previous worlds.
Both Pueblos and Navajos believe that there
were several worlds prior to today’s world.
This is actually quite logical and not
completely alien to our scientific concepts of
how geological layers were created. I began to
consider why, then, would ancient rock artists
have preferred one rock layer over another. I
googled “ethnogeology” and found that this
field doesn’t exist.
I’m afraid that our
ethnologic community
has
overlooked
something that may be of importance. Ancient
artists showed a sensitivity to geology that is
reflected in their preference for rock art
settings. It occurred to me that if different
layers corresponded to different previous
worlds, it could be possible that mythological
motifs associated with those worlds might
appear on the corresponding geological layer.
This is highly speculative, of course, but an
examination of what kinds of imagery appear
on each geological layer might yield interesting
results.
Regardless, the sensitivity to
geological layers reflects a knowledge of
geology that probably has cultural implications.
Conclusion Nine: The preference for the
Navajo layer and apparent aversion to the
Entrada layer that was found in this study
implies that ancient cultures were aware of
geologic layers and that this awareness had
some cultural significance.
Education and Enculturation
As I walked through the canyons I couldn’t
help but think about what significance a fortynine mile long art gallery would have had for
the people who traveled through it. Of course
they had their stories, their songs and a few
portable objects that carried cultural content,
but the rock art was an integral part of the land,
and they would have confronted it each day in
their travels as well as at their camps. As I
envision it, extended family groups would
move through the canyons in pursuit of life’s
necessities. Men would often be gone on
hunting trips, and most other able-bodied
adults and older children would often be
outside of the canyon corridor gathering plants
and seeds. But the youngest children and the
elderly or disabled--those who were not so
mobile--would likely stay in the canyons near
the water sources. This would be a prime time
for education, for teaching the young what they
needed to know to be successful members of
their family and of their culture. Certainly
stories and songs would be involved, but what
rock art would offer would be lessons of place.
Each panel is rooted in a place and has
something to tell about that place. Each panel
would elicit stories and songs, as well as
lessons, to teach the young about how to be
people of their kind. There were no textbooks
and no essays to write, but the images in the art
certainly carried information about the places
and their importance to the culture. Repeated
visits would almost be like mnemonic devices
to help drive lessons home. Thor Conway
refers to rock art sites as “sacred reference
points for tribal identity.” (32) They serve to
humanize the landscape, to transform it from a
cold environment indifferent to our needs to a
place that we are a part of, that is intimately
linked to our culture and history.
Steven Simms again says it well:
“The Fremont landscape was
much more than a container.
It was experienced and
imbued with memories and
meanings. Important to the
XXX-73
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
story here is the notion that
landscape is the canvas upon
which rock art is created. For
the Fremont that canvas was a
social landscape. . .” (71)
The rock art sites linked the land to the culture,
communicating heritage to each member of the
society, and insuring continuity over time.
Rock art provided opportunities for education,
stimulus for ritual and ceremony, and a
medium for expression of both cultural and
personal information.
Conclusion Ten: Rock art sites were integral
to the education and enculturation of tribal
members. They linked the culture and lifestyle
to the land. They helped to humanize the
landscape and connect the people to the land
and the land to the people.
V. CONCLUDING REMARKS
My project will continue over the next couple
of years as I hike the length of Horseshoe
Canyon and document the rock art there.
Perhaps more canyons and more rock art
images will bring more insights. For now, I
will conclude by gathering the conclusions that
I have reached so far.
Conclusion One: There is a disproportionately
high number of sites in the Navajo formation
and a disproportionately low number of sites in
the Entrada formation.
Conclusion Two: Rock art in the study area is
dominated by anthropomorphic imagery.
Conclusion Three: Archaic anthropomorphs
are usually pictographs that are nonrepresentational in nature.
XXX-74
Conclusion Four: Formative anthropomorphs
are usually petroglyphs in silhouette with little
detail.
Conclusion Five: Some sites were designed to
provide some sort of information to travelers
on the migratory route.
Conclusion Six: The rock art along the route
showed no evidence of being related
sequentially by content.
Conclusion Seven: There seems to be
influence from one panel to another, both from
place to place and from one time period to
another
Conclusion Eight: Rock is not just a
convenient canvas for the creation of rock art.
It is also an integral part of the spiritual world
of native cultures and this view of the spiritual
nature of rock influenced the native artists.
Conclusion Nine: The preference for the
Navajo layer and apparent aversion to the
Entrada layer that was found in this study
implies that ancient cultures were aware of
geologic layers and that this awareness had
some cultural significance.
Conclusion Ten: Rock art sites were integral
to the education and enculturation of tribal
members. They linked the culture and lifestyle
to the land. They helped to humanize the
landscape and connect the people to the land
and the land to the people.
Jenkinson: Rock Art on an Ancient Migratory Route REFERENCES CITED
Chippindale, Christopher and George Nash.
2004 “Pictures in place: approaches to the
figured landscape of rock-art” in
Christopher Chippindale and George
Nash (eds.). The Figured Landscapes of
Rock-Art: Looking at Pictures in Place.
Cambridge University Press.
Conway, Thor.
1993 Painted Dreams. NorthWord Press,
Minocqua, Wisconsin.
Tipps, Betsy.
1995 Holocene Archeology Near Squaw
Butte, Canyonlands National Park, Utah.
National Park Service, Denver, Colorado.
Turner, Christy.
1963 Petrographs of the Glen Canyon
Region. Northern Arizona Society of
Science and Art, Flagstaff, Arizona.
Whitley, David S.
2000 The Art of the Shaman: Rock Art of
California. The University of Utah
Press, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Keyser, James D.
2004 Art of the Warriors: Rock Art of the
American Plains. The University of
Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Simms, Steven R. and Francois Gohier.
2010 Traces of Fremont: Society and Rock
Art in Ancient Utah. The University of
Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you to hiking partners Nick and Alisa
Jeffries, Adam Jenkinson, Nat Smith, Leigh
Grench, Ryan Anderson, and especially to
Quent and Pam Baker.
XXX-75
Utah Rock Art, Volume XXX, 2012
XXX-76